Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Experimental and Computational Characterization of Dynamic Loading and Structural Resistance of Tunnels in Blast Scenarios

  • Published:
Fire Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Tunnels are key elements in modern traffic networks. Large-scale accidents and malicious threats, such as fires or explosions creating a blast loading, potentially carry very high economical and societal consequences. Compared to other statistically certain events, explosive-induced blasts in tunnels have an extremely low probability of occurrence but at the same time an enormous damage potential for structure, life, and environment. The paper presents a procedure for evaluation consequences of blast loading threat scenarios, focusing on the local and global structural integrity of tunnel constructions. Methods to capture the dynamic loading and the structural resistance, especially considering the dynamic soil response under large stresses and strains, are described. For that, a combined experimental and numerical approach is chosen, including characterization of the soil by dynamic triaxial experiments realizing stress levels of about 1 MPa, acting in 1 ms on the specimen. The analysis showed that the measured triaxial strength of the soil differed from the static by a factor of 2 for the friction angle. Furthermore, scaled experiments have been designed and conducted to demonstrate and investigate the behavior of a buried tunnel segment under blast loading. The results showed that realistic loading charges can cause massive cracking of the tunnel system and a soil sinking of up to 1 cm. Both experimental results obtained from the triaxial tests on the one hand and from the scaled tunnel experiments on the other hand have been validated using numerical models. The good agreement obtained is the essential input parameter for the evaluation of criticality in tunnels under blast loading scenarios.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11
Figure 12
Figure 13
Figure 14
Figure 15
Figure 16
Figure 17

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fridolf K, Nilsson D, Frantzich H (2013) Fire evacuation in underground transportation systems: a review of accidents and empirical research. Fire Technol 49:451–475. doi:10.1007/s10694-011-0217-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Vollmann G, Thewes M, Heimbecher F (2012) Safety and security of underground infrastructure—new concepts for evaluating and mitigating risks of tunnels. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Safety and Security of Tunnels (ISTSS), New York City

  3. Choi S, Brinckerhoff P (2012) Protective design guideline of tunnels. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Safety and Security of Tunnels (ISTSS), New York City

  4. Vollmann G, Kamarianakis S, Thewes M (2014) Quantitative risk and criticality assessment for tunnels under explosive and fire threat scenarios. In: International Symposium on Tunnel Safety and Security, Marseille

  5. Smith P, Hetherington J (1994) Blast and ballistic loading of structures. Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  6. Lönnqvist L (1993) The effects of high explosives in contact with reinforced concrete plates. In: International Symposium on Interaction of Nonnuclear Munitions with Structures

  7. Gebbeken N, Greulich S, Pietzsch A, Landmann F (2004) The engineering tool XPLOSIM to determine the effects of explosive loadings on reinforced and fibre reinforced concrete structures. In: International Symposium on Military Aspects of Blast and Shock

  8. Riedel W, Thoma K, Mayrhofer C, Stolz A (2010) Engineering and numerical tools for explosion protection of reinforced concrete. Int J Protect Struct 1:85–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lua Y, Wanga Z, Chong K (2005) A comparative study of buried structure in soil subjected to blast load using 2D and 3D numerical simulations. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 25:275–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gebbekem N, Ruppert M (1999) On the safety and reliability of high dynamic hydrocode simulations Int J Numer Methods Eng 46:839–851

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Mayrhofer C (1996) Druckausbreitung vom Räumen—Dipole East (Pressure propagation of rooms - dipole east). Fraunhofer Institut für Kurzzeitdynamik, Ernst-Mach-Institut, Efringen-Kirchen

    Google Scholar 

  12. Baker W, Cox PA, Westine PS, Kulesz JJ, Strehlow RA (1983) Explosions hazards and evaluation. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  13. Weerheijm J, Stolz A, Riedel W, Mediavilla J (2012) Modelling loadings and break-up of RC structure due to internal explosion of fragmenting shells. In: MABS Military Aspect of Blast and Shock, Bourges, France

  14. Gronsten G, Berglund R, Carlberg A, Forsén R (2009) Break-up tests with small ammunition houses using cased charges—Kasun III, FOI-R–2479-SE

  15. Lindholm U (1964) Some experiments with the split Hopkinson pressure bar. J Mech Phys Solids 12:317–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Gtote D, Park S, Zhou M (2001) Dynamic behavior of concrete at high strain rates and pressures: I. experimental characterization. Int J Impact Eng 25:869–886

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Malvar L, Crawford J (1998) Dynamic increase factors for concrete. In: 28th DDESB Seminar, August 1998

  18. Structures to Resist the Effects of Accidental Explosions, Unified Facilities Criteria (USA), 2008

  19. Riisgaard B, Ngo T, Mendis P, Georgakis C, Stang H (2007) Dynamic increase factors for high performance concrete in compression using split Hopkinson pressure bar. In: Proceedings 6th International Conference on Fracture Mechanics of Concrete and Concrete Structures

  20. Malvar L, Crawford J (1998) Dynamic increase factors for steel reinforcing bars. In: 28th DDESB Seminar, August 1998

  21. Comité Euro-International du Béton (1993) CEB-FIP Model Code 1990. Redwood Books, Trowbridge

    Google Scholar 

  22. Design of Blast-Resistant Buildings in Petrochemical Facilities, ASCE, 2010

  23. Omidvar M, Iskander M, Bless S (2012) Stress-strain behavior of sand at high strain rates. Int J Impact Eng 49:192–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lee K, Seed H, Dunlop P (1969) Effect of transient loading on the strength of sand. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Mexico City, Mexico

  25. Huy N, van Tol A, Holscher P (2006) Laboratory investigation of the loading rate effects in sand. Report of TU-Delft, Delft, The Netherlands

  26. Abrantes A (2003) Three dimensional stress-strain behavior of cohesionless material subjected to high strain rate. Ph.D. dissertation, Clarkson University (USA), Clarkson

  27. Carroll W (1988) A fast triaxial shear device. Geotech Test J 11(4):276–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. AUTODYN Theory Manual (2005) Revision 4.3. Century Dynamics, San Ramon

    Google Scholar 

  29. Fu Z, Liu S, Wang Z (2013) The strength-dilatancy characteristics embraced in hypoplasticity. Front Struct Civ Eng 7:178–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Wang G, Xie Y (2013) A modified bounding surface hypoplasticity models for sands. In Constitutive modeling of geomaterials: advances and new applications. Springer, Berlin, pp. 231–237.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Riedel W (2009) 10 years RHT: a review of concrete modelling and hydrocode applications. In Predictive modeling of dynamic processes. Springer, New York, pp. 143–166.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  32. Dobratz B, Crawford P (1985) LLNL explosives handbook. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore

    Google Scholar 

  33. Johnson GR, Cook WH (1985) Fracture characteristics of three metals subjected to various strains, strain rates, temperatures and pressures. Eng Fract Mech 21(1):31–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Rogers GF, Mayhew YR (1994) Thermodynamic and transport properties of fluids: SI Units. Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  35. Weldon G (1973) Damage-limiting construction. Fire Technol 9(4):263–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by the program “Research for Civil Security” of the German Federal Government as a part of the Project SKRIBTplus funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF).

Author information

Author notes

  1. M. L. Ruiz-Ripoll

    Present address: Safety Technology and Protective Structures, Fraunhofer Institute for High-Speed Dynamics, Ernst-Mach-Institut, Am Klingelberg 1, 79588, Efringen-Kirchen, Germany

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Safety Technology and Protective Structures, Fraunhofer Institute for High-Speed Dynamics, Ernst-Mach-Institut, Am Klingelberg 1, 79588, Efringen-Kirchen, Germany

    A. Stolz

Authors
  1. A. Stolz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. L. Ruiz-Ripoll
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. L. Ruiz-Ripoll.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Stolz, A., Ruiz-Ripoll, M.L. Experimental and Computational Characterization of Dynamic Loading and Structural Resistance of Tunnels in Blast Scenarios. Fire Technol 52, 1595–1618 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-015-0496-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-015-0496-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation